228

Int. J. Struct. & Civil Engg. Res. 2013 Nimitha Vijayaraghavan and A S Wayal, 2013

EFFECTS OF MANUFACTURED SANDON COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH AND

WORKABILITY OF CONCRETE

Nimitha Vijayaraghavan1* and A S Wayal1

1 Department of Civil Engineering, V.J.T.I, Nathalal Parekh Rd, Matunga East Mumbai, MH -400 031.

*Corresponding author:Nimitha Vijayaraghavan,nimir_1987@yahoo.com

ISSN 2319 – 6009 www.ijscer.comVol. 2, No. 4, November 2013

© 2013 IJSCER. All Rights Reserved

Int. J. Struct. & Civil Engg. Res. 2013

Research Paper

INTRODUCTIONThe main cause of concern is the non-renewable nature of natural sand and thecorresponding increasing demand ofconstruction industry. Therefore looking for analternative to river sand has become anecessity. The cheapest and easiestalternative to natural sand is manufacturingsand by crushing rocks/stones in desired sizeand grade by suitable method. Sand produced

by such means is known as manufactured/crusher/artificial sand.

This paper presents the results ofexperimental investigation of partial and fullreplacement of natural sand by manufacturedsand. The main aim of the paper is to comparethe compressive strength and workability ofconcrete with manufactured and natural sandin varying proportions. The results show thatconcrete with manufactured sand shows higher

A huge amount of concrete is consumed by the construction industry. About 35% volume ofconcrete is comprised of sand. A good quality concrete is produced by careful mixing of cement,fine and coarse aggregates, water and admixtures as needed to obtain an optimum quality andeconomy. Generally cement and coarse aggregates is factory made products and their qualityand standards can be easily controlled and maintained. Water used for mixing of concrete isusually tap water. The fine aggregates or sand used is usually obtained from natural sourcesspecially river beds or river banks. Now-a-days due to constant sand mining the natural sand isdepleting at an alarming rate. Sand dragging from river beds have led to several environmentalissues. Due to various environmental issues Government has banned the dragging of sandfrom rivers. This has led to a scarcity and significant increase in the cost of natural sand. Thereis an urgent need to find an alternative to river sand. The only long term replacement for sand ismanufactured sand.

Keywords: Manufactured sand/Artificial sand, Natural sand, Compressive strength, Workability

229

Int. J. Struct. & Civil Engg. Res. 2013 Nimitha Vijayaraghavan and A S Wayal, 2013

compressive strength whereas workability

decreased with increasing proportion of

manufactured sand.

LITERATURE REVIEWShanmugapriya et al. (2012) concluded from

experimental researchers that compressive

and flexural strength of concrete can be

improved by partial replacement of cement by

silica fume and manufactured sand for natural

fine aggregates. They suggested that optimum

replacement of natural sand by manufactured

sand is 50%.

Saeed Ahmad et al. (2008) have found that

compressive strength of various mix ratios

increased from 7% to 33% whereas

workability decreased from 11% to 67% with

increasing proportion of manufactured sand.

Shyam Prakash et al. (2007) says that

manufactured sand satisfies the requirements

fine aggregates such as strength, gradation,

shape angularity. It is also possible to produce

manufactured sand falling into the desired

grade. They say that the mechanical properties

of manufactured sand depend upon the source

of its raw material, i.e., parent rock. Hence the

selection of the quarry is very important to

quality fine aggregate.

Mahendra R Chitlange et al. (2010)

experimentally proved that due to addition of

steel fiber to natural sand concrete and

manufactured sand concrete there is a

consistent increase in flexural and split tensile

strength whereas there is only a marginal rise

in compressive strength.

EXPERIMENTALINVESTIGATIONMaterials

Cement: Ordinary Portland cement of 53Grade conforming to IS 8112 -1989 9, and thespecific gravity of cement was found to be3.15. The physical properties of cement aregiven in Table 1.

Table1: Physical Properties of Cement

Component Results Requirements

Fineness m2/kg 1.63% <10%

Initial setting time, 135 Minimum

minutes mins 30mins

Final setting time. 315 Maximum

Minutes mins 10 h

Standard consistency 30%

Soundness 5.53 Maximum

m m 10mm

Fine Aggregate

Natural Sand: Locally available River sand

having bulk density 1.71 kg/m3 was used and

the specific gravity is 2.65. The Fineness

modulus of river sand is 5.24.

Manufactured Sand: M-Sand was used as

partial replacement of fine aggregate. The

bulk density of Manufactured sand was 1.75

kg/m3, specific gravity and fineness modulus

was found to be 2.73 and 4.66, respectively.

The percentage of particles passing

through various sieve were compared with

natural sand and it was found to be similar.

Coarse Aggregate: Crushed angular

aggregate with maximum grain size of 20 mm

230

Int. J. Struct. & Civil Engg. Res. 2013 Nimitha Vijayaraghavan and A S Wayal, 2013

and downgraded was used and having bulk

density 1.38 kg/m3. The specific gravity and

fineness modulus was found to be 2.82 and 8,

respectively

Water: Fresh portable water, which is free from

acid and organic substance, was used for

mixing the concrete.

Mix Proportions and Mix Details

Concrete mix design in this investigation was

designed as per the guidelines specified.

Table 3 shows the mix proportions of Concrete

(kg/m3). Concrete mixtures with different

proportions of manufactured sand for natural

sand ranging from 0% to 100% were casted.

EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURECompressive Strength

The specimen of standard cube of (150 mm x

150 mm x 150 mm) was used to determine

the compressive strength of concrete. Three

specimens were tested for 3, 7 and 28 days

with varying proportion of manufactured sand

replacement. The constituents were weighed

and the materials were mixed in a mixer. The

mixes were compacted with the help of taping

rod. The specimens were de molded after 24

h, cured in water for 3, 7 and 28 days, and

then tested for its compressive strength as per

Indian Standards.

Table 2: Mix Proportions

Proportion 100% Natural Sand 50% Natural Sand 100% Manufactured Sand

Materials (0% Manufactured Sand +50% Manufactured Sand (0% Natural Sand)

Cement+ fly ash 1 1 1+ micro silica

Coarse aggregate

20 mm 1.69 1.41 0.88

10 mm 1.56 1.3 0.81

Fine aggregate 3.25 1.79 1.69

Water 0.28 0.28 0.28

Table 3: Table Showing Compressive Strength Readings

Proportion 100% Natural Sand 50% Natural Sand 100% Manufactured Sand

(0% Manufactured Sand +50% Manufactured Sand (0% Natural Sand)

3 days 35.35 mpa 35.39 mpa 49.39 mpa

7 days 52.35 mpa 46. 59 mpa 59.21 mpa

28 days 70 mpa 72.96 mpa 74.92 mpa

231

Int. J. Struct. & Civil Engg. Res. 2013 Nimitha Vijayaraghavan and A S Wayal, 2013

Table 4: Table Showing Slump Values

Mix Slump (mm)

100% natural sand (0%

manufactured sand 125

50% natural sand 100

+ 50% manufactured sand

100%manufactured sand 34

( 0% natural sand)

Figure 2: Workability Of Concrete WithVarying Proportion Of Manufactured Sand

Workability

The workability of the mixes was determinedusing a slump cone test having same watercement ratio for all the three mixes.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION1. All the mixes of concrete formed by

replacement of natural sand bymanufactured sand when compared toreference mix i.e., 0% replacement, revealhigher compressive strengths.

2. In 50% replacement with admixture thecompressive strength increases by 5.7%.

3. In 100% replacement of natural sand bycrushed sand, the compressive strengthincreases by 7.03%, which is maximum.

4. Concrete mix becomes harsh with increasein proportion of manufactured sand.

5. Results show that the river sand can be fullyreplaced by manufactured sand.

REFERENCES1. Mahendra R Chitlange and Prakash S

Pajgade (2010), “Strength Appraisal ofArtificial Sand as Fine Aggregate”, InSFRC Asian Research PublishingNetwork Journal of Engineering andApplied Sciences, Vol. 5, pp. 34-38.

2. Shanmugapriya T and Uma R N (2012),“Optimization of Partial Replacement ofM-Sand By Natural Sand In HighPerformance Concrete With SilicaFume”, International Journal ofEngineering Sciences & EmergingTechnologies, Vol. 2, pp. 73-80.

3. Saeed Ahmad and Shahid Mahmood(2008), “Effects of Crushed And NaturalSand on The Properties of Fresh andHardened Concrete”, 33rd Conference onOur World In Concrete & Structures,Singapore, pp. 25-27

4. Syam Prakash V (2007), “Ready Mixed

Figure 1: Compressive Strength OfConcrete With Varying Proportion Of

Manufacture Sand

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

100%C.S +0% R.S

50% C.S +50% R.S

0%C.S + 100% R.S

3 days

7days

28days

232

Int. J. Struct. & Civil Engg. Res. 2013 Nimitha Vijayaraghavan and A S Wayal, 2013

Concrete Using Manufactured Sand AsFine Aggregate”, 32nd Conference on Our

World In Concrete & Structures:Singapore.